Domestic support and the WTO negotiations

In their attempt to maximise trade benefits, agricultural trade negotiators must allocate scarce resources and consider trade-offs across issues such as liberalising foreign border measures or reducing foreign domestic subsidies. Analysis and examples support the notion that more liberalisation will be achieved in the new WTO round by emphasis on lowering border barriers and export subsidies rather than attempting to discipline domestic farm subsidies directly. Analyses of EU grain policy, Korean rice policy and US sugar policy show how reduced export subsidy or more import access have substantial trade benefits, even if farmers are compensated with payments or price supports.     

US farm support under a Biden administration: Plus ça change,plus c'est la même chose?

During the Trump administration, there has been an unprecedented increase in the level of domestic support provided to US agricultural producers. Direct farm supports, including price and income support payments, federal crop insurance, and supplemental assistance to compensate losses due to the trade war with China and the pandemic, have accounted for more than one‐third of net farm income. Those payments have threatened to push the United States over its World Trade Organization (WTO) domestic support obligations and increased its vulnerability to potential dispute settlement challenges in the WTO. The incoming Biden administration will likely bring a new focus to repurpose farm subsidies to provide environmental benefits, such as reduced greenhouse gas emissions, but to achieve those reforms they will need to convince a US Congress that has historically been prone to maintaining the status quo.     

Integrated regional impact assessment of agricultural trade and domestic environmental policies

It remains challenging to derive general findings and conclusions from either economic theory or empirical studies on the relationship between international trade and the regional environment. Consequently, we aim to analyse environmental effects of agricultural trade policies in the Austrian Marchfeld region. We apply an integrated modelling framework that accounts for heterogeneity in agricultural production and environmental outcomes. Scenario analysis is applied to assess regional impacts of different trade policy scenarios. Sensitivity analyses reveal the relative influence of model parameters on outputs. The results indicate that lower domestic tariffs have small beneficial effects on the regional environment. The regional environmental impacts highly depend on the changes in world crop prices through global trade agreements. A laissez-faire market scenario that includes the elimination of trade barriers and agri-environmental payments (AEPs) leads to substantial environmental deterioration. Hence, the alignment of AEPs with WTO trading rules remains an important issue in the trade and environment debate.     

The War in Ukraine,Food Security and the Role for Europe

Food-security implications of the war in Ukraine are exacerbated by adverse weather events, spillover effects from the distortion of energy and fertiliser markets, and domestic policies that countries around the world have implemented in pursuit of food security. Estimates suggest that the cumulative effect of these channels in terms of restricting agricultural and food trade is in the order of over 10 times larger, and their cumulative effect on global food supply is on average three times more substantial than the direct agricultural supply disruptions in Ukraine. The latter, however, disproportionally impacts low-income countries that are particularly vulnerable to food supply shortages and price increases. In the case of the EU, although overall food availability is not at stake, food affordability for low-income households is a concern, especially when combined with rising prices of other essential goods, such as energy and transportation. To ensure the resilience of domestic and global food systems, the EU and its Member States should extend a set of already implemented policies, including better-targeted support for the low-income households in the region, implementation of trade facilitation measures via international cooperation, and support for agricultural production in the most vulnerable countries, and should also facilitate the restoration of Ukraine's lost agricultural assets.     

Brexit: How Will UK Agriculture Fare?

There is little doubt that Brexit would have significant implications for UK agriculture, a sector with strong trade links to the EU and strong reliance on CAP income support. This article reports preliminary results from employing a Computable General Equilibrium Model, a Partial Equilibrium Model and Farm Level Models to explore selected trade and domestic policy scenarios post‐Brexit. These allow for the estimation of changes in producer prices, production and farm incomes against a baseline scenario of continued EU membership. Under a Free Trade Agreement with the EU, agricultural impacts are relatively modest. By contrast, unilateral removal of import tariffs has significant negative impacts on prices, production and incomes. Adoption of the EU's WTO tariff schedule for all imports favours net importers (e.g. dairy) and harms net exporters (e.g. sheep). Given the strong dependence of most UK farms on direct payments, their removal worsens negative impacts of new trade arrangements and offsets positive impacts. Impacts vary across different types and sizes of farm, but also regionally. However, the period of adjustment to new trade and domestic policy conditions may prove very challenging for a large number of farm businesses.     

European Agriculture after Brexit: Does Anyone Benefit from the Divorce?

The UK exited the EU on 31 January 2020, with a transition period agreed as part of the Withdrawal Agreement. During this transition period the UK and the EU will decide on their future trading relationship. No matter what form this relationship takes, there will be disturbances to agri‐food markets. This study analyses four different scenarios with increasing barriers to trade, ranging from a very close relationship similar to the European Economic Area to a distant relationship in which the UK and EU trade on Most Favoured Nation terms, using the EU focused global agricultural sector model CAPRI. In the UK, food prices will increase in all scenarios, making consumers in the UK the biggest losers. Only in a free trade agreement scenario does the UK show an unambiguous positive net welfare gain in just the agri‐food sector. In the case of the European Economic Area scenario, which assumes continued access to the single market, the net welfare impact would depend on the size of the UK’s continued contribution to the EU. In the EU, declining food prices would benefit consumers but the sum of the loss in farmers’ incomes and the UK’s EU CAP contribution would be much greater than the consumer’s gain. These impacts in agricultural markets under different future trade arrangements will also be influenced by the UK’s agricultural policy changes in direct payments as well as by possible further UK trade liberalisation after the end of the transition period.     

中国农业支持水平衡量与评价

本文运用OECD的方法对我国1994—2003年的农业支持水平进行了实证分析。结果表明,我国农业支持水平总体呈上升趋势。20世纪90年代后期农业基础设施投资的大量增加、粮食保护价收购政策的实施使得农业生产者支持水平从2000年起由负向正转变。但是与世界发达国家相比,我国的农业支持水平依然很低,政府应该进一步加强对农业的支持和保护力度。     

Setting Climate Action as the Priority for the Common Agricultural Policy: A Simulation Experiment

We quantitatively assess the impacts of re-allocating budgetary resources within Pillar 1 of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) from direct income support to a direct greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction subsidy for EU farmers. The analysis is motivated by the discussion on the future CAP, with calls for both an increased ambition on climate action from the agricultural sector and for a more incentive-based delivery system of direct payments under strict budgetary restrictions. By conducting a simulation experiment with an agricultural partial equilibrium model (CAPRI), we are able to factor in farmers’ supply and technology-adjusting responses to the policy change and to estimate the potential uptake of the GHG-reduction subsidy in EU regions. We find that a budget-neutral re-allocation of financial resources towards subsidised emission savings can reduce EU agricultural non-CO₂ emissions by 21% by 2030, compared to a business-as-usual baseline. Two-thirds of the emission savings are due to changes in production levels and composition, implying that a significant part of the achieved GHG reduction is offset globally by emission leakage. At the aggregated level, the emission-saving subsidy and increased producer prices compensate farmers for the foregone direct income support, but differences in regional impacts indicate accelerated structural change and heterogeneous income effects in the farm population. We conclude that the assumed regional budget-neutrality condition introduces inefficiencies in the incentive system, and the full potential of the EU farming sector for GHG emissions reduction is not reached, leaving ample room for the design of more efficient agricultural policies for climate action.     

Exchange rate alignment and producer support estimates (PSEs) for India

This article examines the effects of exchange rate alignment during 1985–2002 on agricultural producer support estimates (PSEs) for India. Based on several time series techniques, the equilibrium exchange rate of the Indian rupee and the corresponding misalignment of the actual rate are estimated and applied to recent PSE calculations. Our results show that the exchange rate was substantially misaligned before a financial crisis and macroeconomic reform in the early 1990s, with subsequent indirect effects on the PSEs. We find a relatively high pass‐through of exchange rate movements to domestic agricultural prices, so that removal of the exchange rate misalignment would have improved incentives to Indian farmers during this period. More recently, this indirect exchange rate effect is smaller than the direct effect in the PSEs, indicating the dominance of sectoral‐specific policies over economy‐wide policies.     

Domestic Support and Border Measures for Processed Horticultural Products

In horticultural markets, trade barriers often apply to the processed products whereas domestic support applies to farm-produced raw commodities. Here we assess the effects of such trade barriers and domestic support by simulating the effects of policy reform on global processing tomato markets, which are faced with modest processed product tariffs and high domestic support in the European Union (EU). Both protection and EU subsidy drive down world welfare, but we find that reducing import tariffs for tomato products would yield greater effects on markets and larger welfare impacts outside Europe than would reductions in EU domestic support.     

AN EXAMINATION OF THE TAX SUBSIDIES TO THE DAIRY SECTORS IN CANADA,GERMANY NEW ZEALAND AND THE UNITED STATES

Subsidies to agricultural producers through domestic tax and social programme policies are generally not included in producer subsidy equivalent (PSE) measures. This study examines the price induced distortions of domestic tax policy and social programmes on dairy trade between Canada, New Zealand, Germany, and the United States. The degree of tax subsidisation and the price subsidies needed to offset the tax and social programme advantages enjoyed by each country are estimated using a simulation model. Study findings suggest that current German taxation policy provides a substantial subsidy to dairy producers. Canadian and US farmers also have some trade advantages because of tax policy and social programmes.     

Does the Decoupling Reform Affect Agricultural Employment in Sweden? Evidence from an Exogenous Change

This study uses aggregated municipality data, for the years 2001–2009, to explore whether direct payments to farmers affect agricultural employment in Swedish municipalities. The decoupling reform in 2005 included a new grassland support payment accompanied by management obligations that had unexpectedly high redistributive consequences as it greatly increased common agricultural policy payments to municipalities with large areas of grassland. In some municipalities, total payments more than doubled. Thus, since the reform seems exogenous to the behaviour of farmers and the regional economy, the reform can be used to identify a subsidy effect. We find that a permanent increase in agricultural employment can be attributed to the new grassland support. Our results indicate that the grassland support generates an additional job at a cost of SEK 250,000, relative to the average agricultural wage of SEK 333,000. However, the subsidy effect is largely keeping jobs in agriculture, i.e. the grassland support may be slowing down the process of structural change in grassland regions.     

The Challenge of Decoupling Agricultural Support

The Challenge of Decoupling Agricultural Support
Decoupling agricultural support has become a central feature of reforms in most OECD countries due to international and domestic constraints. There is evidence that this movement can reduce economic inefficiencies and contribute to improving policy design. Not all the characteristics, however, of recent new support programmes, reduce their impact on production. Moving from price support to area payments and granting more freedom in the use of the supported resources makes programmes more decoupled, but making payments counter-cyclical based on current production or market variables tends to exacerbate the production response of risk averse farmers. When all the effects are taken into consideration - relative prices, risk and dynamic effects - all agricultural support programmes have some impact on production and thus the degree of decoupling needs to be estimated empirically. Recent studies have expanded our scarce knowledge of these issues. They confirm the partial decoupling of area payments, like those in the EU after 1992, as well as the larger degree of decoupling that results from more production freedom, as in the Production Flexibility Contract payments in the US and the recent Single Farm Payment in the EU. But the total magnitude of the production effects depends on policy design and 'size', since high levels of partially decoupled support can have potentially significant effects on production.     

Farm Type Effects of an EU‐wide Direct Payment Harmonisation

In this study, we analyse how three scenarios involving different levels of harmonisation of common agricultural policy (CAP) decoupled payments in the EU affect the distribution of farm income across regions and farm types. We use the farm type extension of the common agricultural policy impact (CAPRI) model, which captures farm heterogeneity across the EU. The first scenario (NUTS1) assumes uniform per‐hectare payments at the NUTS1 level. The second scenario (MS‐CONV) equalises the per‐hectare rates inside each Member State (MS) and partially harmonises the single payment scheme (SPS) across MS in line with the 2011 Commission proposal. The third scenario simulates a uniform per‐hectare payment at the EU level. Depending on the implementation of the SPS, the NUTS1 flat rate induces a substantial redistribution of payments across farm types and NUTS2 regions, particularly in regions that apply the historical SPS. The MS‐CONV and EU flat‐rate schemes have more significant impacts at the EU‐wide level. In the EU‐15, almost all farms lose payments from MS‐CONV and EU‐wide flat rates, whereas in the EU‐10, almost all farm types gain from these scenarios. Our conservative estimates indicate that the flat‐rate payments could redistribute up to €8.5 billion. Lower land rental costs partially offset the losses of farm income in the EU‐15 from payment redistribution. Land rents drop for all flat‐rate scenarios across most sectors and farm sizes in the EU‐15. In the less productive new MS, the landowners’ rental income is largely unaffected by the introduction of the flat rate.     

Agriculture trade restrictiveness in Canada: How important are the cross effects?

A trade restrictiveness index (TRI) aggregates an entire protection structure into a single uniform measure that is consistent with trade theory and reflects the extent of policy interventions on trade or welfare. Although there are several variants of a TRI, all approaches aggregate protective measures using weights that depend on import demand and export supply elasticities; some studies ignore cross-price effects while others account for them. This study measures the degree of bias introduced by ignoring cross effects. It provides a practical approach to account for demand- and supply-side cross-price effects in a multi-commodity TRI setting. This approach is illustrated with a case study of distortions in the Canadian crop and livestock sector. Domestic demand and supply cross effects are approximated using a “constant differences of elasticities of substitution” functional form. On average, over the period 1996–2016, we find that cross-price effects do make a difference, and that including them makes the TRI 27% higher than an approach which ignores them. Furthermore, both TRI approaches produce indices that are higher and more variable than the OECD's percentage Producer Support Estimate (PSE) that measures policy transfers as a share of gross farm receipts. The fundamental differences between a TRI and PSE% is driven by market price support for milk.     

Subsidies and agricultural productivity in the EU

This paper investigates the relationship between EU agricultural subsidies and agricultural labor productivity growth by estimating a conditional convergence growth model. We use more representative subsidy indicators and a wider coverage (panel data from 213 EU regions over the period 2004–2014) than have been used before. We find that, on average, EU's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) subsidies increase agricultural labor productivity growth, but this aggregate effect hides important heterogeneity of effects of different types of subsidies. The positive effect on productivity comes from decoupled subsidies, that is, Pillar I decoupled payments and some Pillar II payments. Coupled Pillar I subsidies have the opposite effect: they slow down productivity growth.     

BRIC Agricultural Policies Through a WTO Lens

This article examines the agricultural policies of Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) through the prism of the disciplines on agricultural domestic support in the World Trade Organization (WTO). Although the BRIC are often grouped collectively as an emerging force in the world economy, divergent agricultural interests are reflected in different approaches towards agricultural policy both through international dispute settlement and notification of their own support. We examine the support notified to the WTO for verification of compliance with their legal commitments, which under the complex WTO rules often differs significantly from measurement of support in economic terms. We note the resulting difficulties of these disciplines in establishing limits on trade‐distorting support. Implications of a Doha agreement are examined. Although the prospect of adoption of new Doha disciplines has become remote, the negotiated provisions are informative about the future policy space the BRIC sought to maintain. Russia’s domestic support commitments under its 2012 WTO accession extend the international disciplines but share the complexity of the other cases.     

European trade in forest products and fuels

The purpose has been to determine to what extent differences in net trade and revealed comparative advantage between EU member states could be explained by differences in forest endowments, domestic demand, energy policies and other country specific characteristics. An adopted model of the Heckscher–Ohlin theory, suggesting a direct relationship between a country's trade, forest endowments and income (HOV model), has been empirically estimated for three forest products (roundwood, chips & particles and wood fuel), 19 European countries and for the period 1994–2006. Both net export and an index of revealed comparative advantages was constructed and used as dependent variables. Moreover, different model specification was estimated using different measures of forest endowments. The results suggest that forest endowments are an important determinant for explaining differences in net trade of the included forest commodities. However, domestic demand, measured by income level, is not. Thus, the results provide mixed support for the HOV model.     

Towards a theory of policy timing*

The article presents a theory of policy timing that relies on uncertainty and transaction costs to explain the optimal timing and duration of policy reforms. Delaying reforms resolves some uncertainty by gaining valuable information and saves transaction costs. Implementing reforms without waiting increases welfare by adjusting domestic policies to changed market parameters. Optimal policy timing is found by balancing the trade‐off between delaying reforms and implementing reforms without waiting. Our theory offers an explanation of why countries differ with respect to the length of their policy reforms and why applied studies often judge agricultural policies to be inefficient when actually they may not be.     

The Role of the Common Agricultural Policy in Enhancing Farm Income: A Dynamic Panel Analysis Accounting for Farm Size in Italy

As a multi-objective policy, the EU Common Agricultural Policy continues to secure significant income support for farmers as one of the nine specific objectives. We estimate the income transfer efficiency of a broad set of pivotal policy measures, focusing on the effects of farm structure on income transfer efficiency. We use dynamic modelling, based on a micro-data panel of Italian farms for the period 2008–2014, allowing for endogeneity, simultaneity bias, and omitted variables. In line with previous studies and economic expectations, we find that decoupled direct payments provide the highest contribution to agricultural incomes, followed by agri-environmental payments and on-farm investment subsidies. Coupled payments have no significant impacts on farmers’ income. Generally, for all analysed Common Agricultural Policy measures, large farms benefit from greater transfer efficiency levels compared with medium and small farms. These differences among instruments and across farms suggest that policy-participation costs may play a pivotal role, together with the economic structure of farms, in determining the income transfer efficiency of CAP policies.